An M2A2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle fires rounds from a 25-mm chaingun as U.S. Army Spcs. Daniel Brothers
and William McGrath prepare to engage the enemy after coming under fire in Buhriz, Iraq, Feb. 15, 2007.
Rep. Pete Stark—who represented California in the House of Representatives from 1973-2013 (the 13th district for his final two decades in office)—delivered the following speech 13 years ago, on October 10, 2002, against the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq resolution. He was one of 126 House Democrats and six Republicans who voted no. (And, no, it's
NOT tl;dr.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution.
I am deeply troubled that lives may be lost without a meaningful attempt to bring Iraq into compliance with UN resolutions through careful and cautious diplomacy.
The bottom line is I don’t trust this President and his advisors.
Make no mistake, we are voting on a resolution that grants total authority to the President who wants to invade a sovereign nation without any specific act of provocation. This would authorize the United States to act as the aggressor for the first time in our history.
It sets a precedent for our nation - or any nation - to exercise brute force anywhere in the world without regard to international law or international consensus.
Congress must not walk in lockstep behind a President who has been so callous to proceed without reservation, as if war was of no real consequence.
You know, three years ago in December, Molly Ivins, an observer of Texas politics, wrote: "For an upper-class white boy, Bush comes on way too hard. At a guess, to make up for being an upper-class white boy.”
"Somebody," she said, "should be worrying about how all this could affect his handling of future encounters with some Saddam Hussein." How prophetic, Ms. Ivins.
Let us not forget that our President - our Commander in Chief – has no experience with, or knowledge of, war. In fact, he admits that he was at best ambivalent about the Vietnam War. He skirted his own military service and then failed to serve out his time in the National Guard. And, he reported years later that at the height of that conflict in 1968 he didn’t notice "any heavy stuff going on."
So we have a President who thinks foreign territory is the opponent’s dugout and Kashmir is a sweater.
What is most unconscionable is that there is not a shred of evidence to justify the certain loss of life. Do the generalized threats and half-truths of this Administration give any one of us in Congress the confidence to tell a mother or father or family that the loss of their child or loved one was in the name of a just cause?
Is the President’s need for revenge for the threat once posed to his father enough to justify the death of any American?
I submit the answer to these questions is no.
Aside from the wisdom of going to war as Bush wants, I am troubled by who pays for his capricious adventure into world domination.
The Administration admits to a cost of around $200 billion!
Now, wealthy individuals won’t pay. They’ve got big tax cuts already.
Corporations won’t pay. They’ll cook the books and move overseas and then send their contributions to the Republicans.
Rich kids won’t pay. Their daddies will get them deferments as Big George did for George W.
Well then, who will pay?
School kids will pay. There’ll be no money to keep them from being left behind - way behind.
Seniors will pay. They’ll pay big time as the Republicans privatize Social Security and rob the Trust Fund to pay for the capricious war.
Medicare will be curtailed and drugs will be more unaffordable. And there won’t be any money for a drug benefit because Bush will spend it all on the war.
Working folks will pay through loss of job security and bargaining rights.
Our grandchildren will pay through the degradation of our air and water quality.
And the entire nation will pay as Bush continues to destroy civil rights, women’s rights and religious freedom in a rush to phony patriotism and to courting the messianic Pharisees of the religious right.
The questions before the members of this House and to all Americans are immense, but there are clear answers. America is not currently confronted by a genuine, proven, imminent threat from Iraq. The call for war is wrong.
And what greatly saddens me at this point in our history is my fear that this entire spectacle has not been planned for the well being of the world, but for the short-term political interest of our President.
Now, I am also greatly disturbed that many Democratic leaders have also put political calculation ahead of the President’s accountability to truth and reason by supporting this resolution.
But, I conclude that the only answer is to vote no on the resolution before us.
Nail. Hammer. Head.
Blast from the Past. At Daily Kos on this date in 2010—I like horses, long walks on the beach, and dressing up like a Nazi SS officer:
Remember, kids: It is dangerous and irresponsible to compare a person who likes to spend their weekends dressing up like a Nazi to... a Nazi.
An election year already notable for its menagerie of extreme and unusual candidates can add another one: Rich Iott, the Republican nominee for Congress from Ohio's 9th District, and a Tea Party favorite, who for years donned a German Waffen SS uniform and participated in Nazi re-enactments.Remember, kids: It is dangerous and irresponsible to compare a person who likes to spend their weekends dressing up like a Nazi to... a Nazi.
You know, that is pretty notable, isn't it? I'm not particularly shocked to find out that a Teabagger Republican is, well, eccentric. But I'm a little surprised to find out that these Super-Patriots like to dress up and play the enemy. Yeah, yeah, I know. Maybe that's not really a stretch, either. But seriously, given how intent they are on insisting that they're more patriotic than any of the other kids on the block, wouldn't you think they'd be the kind of playmates who'd always insist on being the U.S., and threaten to quit and go home if they didn't get their way?
Tweet of the Day
On
today's Kagro in the Morning show: Free-Form Friday preempted for School Shooting Friday. Again. Ben Carson, who has a broad definition of "organizations" and a limited definition of "gun safety", tries again to understand “debt ceiling”. Has the Gop quit being an "organization"? Some are concerned if they go fast or slow, some if they should stay or go, but no one wants to lead. Paul Ryan has one good reason to not be speaker. Did McCarthy jump or was he pushed? Pastor Jim Bakker, who is still around, says satanic temples are hidden in Planned Parenthood clinics. The Right's history of graphic, misleading abortion images. Free biz idea: get employees to work for free.
Find us on iTunes | Find us on Stitcher | RSS | Donate to support the show!
High Impact Posts • Top Comments